D

Intel

Full Report Methodology

Corporate Values on Democracy

Made a statement in support of democracy CEO is a member of the Business Roundtable, which has released pro-democracy statements in recent years Released a statement opposing the events of January 6th, 2021 Published an annual corporate responsibility disclosure/report Published a public political spending disclosure Took a major action in support of voting rights or democracy Has not enabled or allowed its platform to be used to share electoral mis/disinformation

Corporate Values and Political Spending

Donated to federal lawmakers who opposed voting rights legislation during the 2022 election cycle Donated to federal lawmakers who objected to certifying the 2020 presidential election Donated to federal lawmakers who opposed creating a Congressional January 6th investigation Did not donate to state officials who voted for anti-voter legislation during the 2022 election cycle Did not donate to state officials who supported 2020 election audits Key company staff made large donations to anti-democracy federal legislators during the 2022 election cycle Is a member of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which opposed recent federal voting legislation

Let Intel Know Where You Stand

Tell the CEO and other corporate leaders what you think about their commitment to democracy.

Send an email to Intel:
 [email protected]

Tweet Intel: @intel
Send Tweet

Share This Report

Let your friends and followers know how Intel is performing in supporting our democracy, and encourage them to take action.

Intel: Full Report

Click on the arrows below to learn more about how Intel supports democratic ideals and details about their political spending.

Intel's values on democracy

Intel Has Made An Independent Public Statement In Support Of Voting Rights, Saying “We Oppose Any Legislation That Seeks To Reduce The Voting Rights Or Opportunities Of American Citizens.”

 

Intel CEO Tweeted That “We Oppose Any Legislation That Seeks To Reduce The Voting Rights Or Opportunities Of American Citizens.” “Our country is stronger with more voting, not less, and with the evolution of technology, voting can be more secure, equitable and accessible. We oppose any legislation that seeks to reduce the voting rights or opportunities of American citizens.’” 

 

[Twitter, @PGelsinger, 4/3/21]

 

Intel Joined The Business For Voting Rights Coalition. 

 

Intel Joined The Business For Voting Rights Coalition. [Business For Voting Rights, Accessed 3/24/22]

  • The 250 Members Of The Business For Voting Rights Coalition Urged Congress To Pass The John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act. “No matter your zip code, race, ethnicity, color, who you vote for, what language you speak, or whether you are our customers, one thing is clear: we all value the right to vote, and believe that all eligible Americans should have free, fair, and safe access to this fundamental right.  This is why 250 companies and business organizations of all sizes and sectors from across the country have come together to urge Congress to introduce and pass the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act, to make fair and safe access to voting real for all. Because the freedom to vote is everyone’s business.” [Business For Voting Rights, Accessed 3/24/22]

 

Intel Did Not Sign On To The April 2021 New York Times Ad Of Corporations Standing For Democracy And Against Restrictive Voting Bills.

 

Neither Intel Nor Its Executives Signed On To The April 2021 New York Times Ad Of Corporations Claiming To Stand For Democracy And Against Restrictive Voting Bills. [The New York Times, 4/14/21]

  • In An April 14, 2021 New York Times Ad, Hundreds Of Companies And Individual Executives Claimed “We Stand For Democracy” And That “We All Should Feel A Responsibility To Defend The Right To Vote And To Oppose Any Discriminatory Legislation” That Would Restrict Voters’ Access To The Ballot. “A beautifully American ideal, but a reality denied to many for much of this nation’s history. As Americans, we know that in our democracy we should not expect to agree on everything. However, regardless of our political affiliations, we believe the very foundation of our electoral process rests upon the ability of each of us to cast our ballots for the candidates of our choice. For American democracy to work for any of us, we must ensure the right to vote for all of us. We all should feel a responsibility to defend the right to vote and to oppose any discriminatory legislation or measures that restrict or prevent any eligible voter from having an equal and fair opportunity to cast a ballot. Voting is the lifeblood of our democracy and we call upon all Americans to join us in taking a nonpartisan stand for this most basic and fundamental right of all Americans. [The New York Times, 4/14/21]

 

Intel Is A Member Of The Civic Alliance, A Nonpartisan Coalition Of Businesses That Seeks To Secure Voting Rights For All Americans.

 

Intel Is A Member Of The Civic Alliance. [Civic Alliance, Accessed 6/6/22]

  • The Civic Alliance Is A Nonpartisan Coalition Of Businesses That Seeks To Secure Voting Rights For All Americans. “Today, dozens of leading companies announced a commitment to participate in the Civic Alliance, America’s premier nonpartisan coalition of businesses working together to build a future where everyone can vote, volunteer, and take action to shape our country.” [Democracy Works, 1/29/20]

Intel’s CEO Is A Member Of The Business Roundtable.

 

As of March 24, 2022, Intel’s CEO Patrick Gelsinger Is A Member Of The Business Roundtable. [Business Roundtable, Accessed 3/24/22]

 

The Business Roundtable Has Released Statements Condemning “Unnecessary Restrictions On The Right To Vote And Has Advocated For Paid Time Off For Voting, Saying “The Strength Of Our Democracy Depends On The Integrity And Fairness Of Our Nation’s Elections.”  

 

The Business Roundtable Released A Statement Condemning “Unnecessary Restrictions On The Right To Vote,” Which It Said Strikes “At The Heart Of Representative Government.” “As changes to voting laws are under consideration in multiple state legislatures, Business Roundtable today issued the following statement on principles that should guide policymakers: ‘The right to vote is the essence of a democratic society, and the voice of every voter should be heard in fair elections that are conducted with integrity. Unnecessary restrictions on the right to vote strike at the heart of representative government. Business Roundtable members believe state laws must safeguard and guarantee the right to vote.’” [Business Roundtable, 3/31/21]

  • The Business Roundtable Statement Called On “Elected Officials Across The Country To Commit To Bipartisan Efforts To Provide Greater Access To Voting And Encourage Broad Voter Participation.” “‘Over the course of our nation’s history, the right to vote was hard fought for so many Americans, particularly women and people of color. We call on elected officials across the country to commit to bipartisan efforts to provide greater access to voting and encourage broad voter participation.’” [Business Roundtable, 3/31/21]

 

“Business Roundtable CEOs: Paid Time Off And Flexibility For Voting Are Best Practices.” [Business Roundtable, 7/21/20]

  • The Business Roundtable Said Some Member Companies Provide Paid Time Off To Vote, Adding That “Companies Should Consider Supporting Employees By Providing Information On Voter Registration And Alternatives Such As Voting By Mail Or Early Voting.” “’Many Business Roundtable member companies already provide paid time off – either a full or partial day – to employees for voting. Business Roundtable CEOs agree on the fundamental principle of supporting our employees in exercising their right to vote, by allowing flexibility and paid time off to vote that fits with their employment. In addition, companies should consider supporting employees by providing information on voter registration and alternatives such as voting by mail or early voting. We consider these best practices, which we encourage more companies to adopt.’” [Business Roundtable, 7/21/20]
  • Business Roundtable Statement: “We Believe No American – Including Our Employees – Should Have To Choose Between Keeping Their Job And Casting Their Vote.” “Elections in the United States fall on workdays for millions of Americans, making it difficult for some to participate in a civic process that is core to our democracy. As business leaders and employers of, collectively, over 15 million people, we believe no American – including our employees – should have to choose between keeping their job and casting their vote.” [Business Roundtable, 7/21/20]

 

The Business Roundtable Released A Statement Saying “The Strength Of Our Democracy Depends On The Integrity And Fairness Of Our Nation’s Elections,” Welcoming “Efforts To Address Barriers To Voting” At The State Level. “The strength of our democracy depends on the integrity and fairness of our nation’s elections. With the 2020 election season underway, Business Roundtable welcomes efforts by governors to address barriers to voting, including new challenges raised by the pandemic. […] ‘Voting is a democratic principle that equally values the voice of every citizen. For so many Americans, voting was a hard-fought right. All Americans who qualify should be able to exercise this right free from unnecessary hurdles.’” [Business Roundtable, 7/21/20]

 

Business Roundtable Released A Statement Calling The January 6 Capitol Attack “Inexcusable Violence” And Said ‘That Elected Officials’ Perpetuation Of The Fiction Of A Fraudulent 2020 Presidential Election Is Not Only Reprehensible, But Also A Danger To Our Democracy.” “Yesterday’s inexcusable violence and chaos at the Capitol makes clear that elected officials’ perpetuation of the fiction of a fraudulent 2020 presidential election is not only reprehensible, but also a danger to our democracy, our society and our economy. As businesses who operate in and employ millions of people in all 50 states, we represent Americans of all political backgrounds who cast their votes on Election Day. While our ballots may have been divided, our support for the democratic process and the peaceful transition of power must be unequivocal.” [Business Roundtable, 1/7/21]

 

Intel Made A Statement Opposing The Events Of January 6, 2021, Saying “We Will Not Contribute To Members Of Congress Who Voted Against Certification Of The Electoral College Results As We Feel That Action Was Counter To Our Company’s Values.”

 

Intel Spokesperson: “While Intel’s PAC Will Continue Bipartisan Contributions, We Will Not Contribute To Members Of Congress Who Voted Against Certification Of The Electoral College Results As We Feel That Action Was Counter To Our Company’s Values.” “‘Intel’s Political Action Committee continuously reevaluates its contributions to candidates to ensure that they align with our values, policies and priorities. While Intel’s PAC will continue bipartisan contributions, we will not contribute to members of Congress who voted against certification of the Electoral College results as we feel that action was counter to our company’s values.’ ⎯ Intel Spokesperson William Moss” [CNN, 2/5/21]

 

After A Violent Mob Stormed The U.S. Capitol On January 6, 2021, 147 Members Of Congress Still Objected To Certifying The Results Of The 2020 Election.

 

On January 6, 2021, A Violent Mob Stormed The U.S. Capitol In Response To Congress’ Constitutionally Mandated Counting Of The Electoral College Results “In A Stunning Attempt To Overturn America’s Presidential Election.” “A violent mob loyal to President Donald Trump stormed the U.S. Capitol on Wednesday and forced lawmakers into hiding, in a stunning attempt to overturn America’s presidential election, undercut the nation’s democracy and keep Democrat Joe Biden from replacing Trump in the White House. […] Tensions were already running high when lawmakers gathered early Wednesday afternoon for the constitutionally mandated counting of the Electoral College results, in which Biden defeated Trump, 306-232.” [AP, 1/6/21]

 

Following The Violence At The Capitol On January 6, Four People In The Crowd Died. “As a pro-Trump protest turned into a violent attack on the Capitol on Jan. 6 last year, four people in the crowd died.” [New York Times, 1/5/22]

 

147 Members Of Congress Objected To Certifying The 2020 Presidential Election. [The New York Times, 1/7/21]

 

Intel’s Most Recent Corporate Responsibility Disclosure (CSR, ESG, And Comparable Reports) Was Published For 2021-22.

 

Intel’s Most Recent Corporate Responsibility Disclosure (CSR, ESG, And Comparable Reports) Was Released For 2021-2022. [Intel, Accessed 6/13/22]

 

Companies That Increase Transparency On Environmental And Social Concerns Will Be More Viable — And Valuable — In The Long Term While Those That Fail To Release Thorough Disclosures Risk Investors Shunning A Stock Or Organizing Public Rebukes.

 

Deloitte: “Companies That Hold Themselves Accountable To Their Stakeholders By Increasing Transparency [Regarding Environmental And Social Concerns] Will Be More Viable — And Valuable — In The Long Term.” “The business landscape today has been transformed by environmental and social concerns. As understanding grows about the risk and value creation opportunities that ESG presents, the demand for ESG disclosure has accelerated. The companies that hold themselves accountable to their stakeholders by increasing transparency will be more viable — and valuable — in the long term.” [Deloitte, 3/14/22]

 

A March 2022 Deloitte Survey Found That Over Half Of Senior Executives Are Working To Establish “An ESG Council Or Working Group In Place To Drive Strategic Attention To ESG Topics.”

“Despite increased focus on ESG matters from stakeholders and the need to internally mobilize to create a robust ESG strategy and governance structure, less than a quarter (21% of survey respondents) currently have an ESG council or working group in place to drive strategic attention to ESG topics; however, more than half (57% of survey respondents) are actively working to establish one. A strong majority of senior executives (82% of survey respondents) also believe they will need additional resources to generate ESG disclosures that meet the information needs of critical stakeholders.” [Deloitte, 3/14/22]

  • Deloitte Surveyed “300 Senior Finance, Legal And Sustainability Leaders.” “New Deloitte survey of 300 senior finance, legal and sustainability leaders shows companies are working toward more reliable — and timely — data, with investments in technology, controls design and implementation resources, and a robust, integrated strategy to meet the growing expectation for high quality ESG reporting information.” [Deloitte, 3/14/22]

 

The New York Times: “Political Donations Fall Within The Purview Of The Burgeoning Environmental, Social And Governance Investing Movement, Known As E.S.G.” And “By Not Being Forthcoming About Donations, Or By Waving Away Inconsistencies Between Statements And Spending” Investors Could “Shun A Stock” Or “Organize Public Rebukes Of Directors.” “Political donations fall within the purview of the burgeoning environmental, social and governance investing movement, known as E.S.G. With more money being invested according to these principles, falling short in these areas — by not being forthcoming about donations, or by waving away inconsistencies between statements and spending — could lead investors to shun a stock or, as we have seen, organize public rebukes of directors. There are also regulatory, litigation and insurance risks to E.S.G. shortcomings, which could dent a company’s bottom line.” [The New York Times, 6/5/21]

Intel’s Most Recent Public Political Spending Disclosure Was Published For The First Half Of 2021.

 

Intel’s Most Recent Public Political Spending Disclosure Was Released For The First Half Of 2021. [Intel, Accessed 3/24/22]

 

As The Number Of Corporations That Disclose Or Prohibit Political Spending Hit An All-Time High In 2021, Shareholders Have Been Calling For Disclosure Around Political Spending At Annual Shareholder Meetings. 

 

The Number Of Public Companies That “Disclose Or Prohibit Political Spending Hit A Record” In 2021. “Campaign finance reform might be dead in Washington, but it’s making progress at the highest levels of corporate America. The number of public companies that disclose or prohibit political spending hit a record this year and more corporations are assigning directors the responsibility of decision-making amid an era of hyper-partisanship.” [Politico, 11/30/21]

 

Shareholders Of Publicly Traded Companies Planned To “Call For Increased Disclosure Around Political Spending” At Annual Shareholder Meetings. “A call for increased disclosure around political spending from elected officials and shareholders could come to a head this spring as a number of publicly-traded companies hold their annual general meetings.” [Fortune, 5/12/21]

 

In Light Of The Capitol Insurrection And The Wave Of Voter Restriction Laws, “Investors Want To Know More About” Companies’ Political Spending.

 

The New York Times: “After The Capitol Riot And A Republican Push To Pass Restrictive Voting Laws That Disproportionately Affect Racial Minorities, Investors Want To Know More About Where A Company’s Political Donations End Up.” “Investors are battling with corporate boards, filing shareholder resolutions that demand more transparency and accountability about political donations. Increasingly, they’re winning. ‘It can’t be overstated how much the events of this year have put the focus on political spending,’ said Shelley Alpern, the director of shareholder advocacy at Rhia Ventures, a social impact investment firm. After the Capitol riot and a Republican push to pass restrictive voting laws that disproportionately affect racial minorities, investors want to know more about where a company’s political donations end up.” [The New York Times, 6/5/21]

  • Rhia Ventures’ Director Of Shareholder Advocacy Shelley Alpern: “It Can’t Be Overstated How Much The Events Of This Year Have Put The Focus On Political Spending […] Something Has Changed Palpably In The Public’s And Shareholders’ Understanding.” “‘It can’t be overstated how much the events of this year have put the focus on political spending,’ said Shelley Alpern, the director of shareholder advocacy at Rhia Ventures, a social impact investment firm. After the Capitol riot and a Republican push to pass restrictive voting laws that disproportionately affect racial minorities, investors want to know more about where a company’s political donations end up. ‘Something has changed palpably in the public’s and shareholders’ understanding,’ Ms. Alpern said.” [The New York Times, 6/5/21]

 

The New York Times: “Investors Are On Alert For Companies That Take One Position And Make Donations That Support Another.” “Investors are on alert for companies that take one position and make donations that support another.” [The New York Times, 6/5/21]

Intel Is A Time To Vote Member, A Nonpartisan, CEO-Led Organization That Aims To Increase Voter Participation.

 

Intel Is Represented By An Executive At Time To Vote. [Time To Vote, Accessed 3/24/22]

  • Time To Vote Is “Led By CEOs Who Are Interested In Increasing Voter Participation” And Represent Their Companies In The Coalition “Time To Vote is a nonpartisan effort for companies that want to contribute to the culture shift needed to increase voter participation in our country’s elections. We’re led by CEOs who are interested in increasing voter participation and represent the following companies.” [Time To Vote, Accessed 3/24/22]
  • The Companies That Make Up Time To Vote “Made A Commitment To Ensure That Their Employees Had A Work Schedule That Allowed Them Time To Vote.” “One of the most common reasons people give for not voting is that they’re too busy with the demands of work and life. To address this barrier and increase voter participation, a diverse coalition of companies came together in the summer of 2018 to launch Time To Vote. The companies made a commitment to ensure that their employees had a work schedule that allowed them time to vote in that year’s midterm elections.” [Time To Vote, Accessed 3/24/22]
  • Time To Vote Describes Itself As “A Non-Partisan Effort That Demonstrates The Power Of What The Business Community Can Achieve When It Works To Address The Most Significant Issues Of Our Time.” “This movement is a non-partisan effort that demonstrates the power of what the business community can achieve when it works to address the most significant issues of our time. Together, we can have an even greater impact. Join us.” [Time To Vote, Accessed 3/24/22]

 

Intel Does Not Appear To Have Enabled The Sharing Of Electoral Misinformation/Disinformation Nor Allowed Its Platform To Be Used To Share Electoral Misinformation/Disinformation Since The 2020 Election Cycle.

 

Intel Does Not Appear To Have Enabled The Sharing Of Electoral Misinformation/Disinformation Nor Allowed Its Platform To Be Used To Share Electoral Misinformation/Disinformation Since The 2020 Election Cycle. Accountable.US conducted Nexis and Google searches using Intel’s name combined with the terms “disinformation” and each of the following: “election,” “2020,” “ballot,” “vote,” and “voting.” Accountable.US also ran the same searches with the term “misinformation.” As of August 9, 2022, Intel does not appear to have enabled the sharing of electoral misinformation/disinformation nor allowed its platform to be used to share electoral misinformation/disinformation since the 2020 election cycle. 

 

Misinformation And Disinformation Negatively Affect Election Outcomes And Ultimately Erode Confidence In Democracy, Generating “Support For Emergent Anti-Democratic Forces.”

 

The Washington Post: “Around The World, There Are Increasing Concerns That ‘Fake News’ Threatens Democracy. Our Recent Research Supports This View — Democracy Is Less Likely To Survive In A Poor Informational Environment.”  “Around the world, there are increasing concerns that “fake news” threatens democracy. Our recent research supports this view — democracy is less likely to survive in a poor informational environment. Our book shows that when voters are poorly informed, enough voters are more likely to make mistakes at the polls. This leads to the election of incompetent — and perhaps corrupt or self-dealing — governments. Here’s why this matters: Such outcomes at the polls lower public confidence in democracy and generate support for emergent anti-democratic forces.” [Washington Post, 4/5/19]

  • The Washington Post Said Election Outcomes Are Affected Negatively By Poor Informational Environments, Which Lowers “Public Confidence In Democracy” And Generates “Support For Emergent Anti-Democratic Forces.”  “Around the world, there are increasing concerns that “fake news” threatens democracy. Our recent research supports this view — democracy is less likely to survive in a poor informational environment. Our book shows that when voters are poorly informed, enough voters are more likely to make mistakes at the polls. This leads to the election of incompetent — and perhaps corrupt or self-dealing — governments. Here’s why this matters: Such outcomes at the polls lower public confidence in democracy and generate support for emergent anti-democratic forces.” [Washington Post, 4/5/19]

 

The Brookings Institution: “One Of The Drivers Of Decreased Confidence In The Political System Has Been The Explosion Of Misinformation Deliberately Aimed At Disrupting The Democratic Process.” [The Brookings Institution, 7/26/22]

  • The Collaborative Multi-Racial Political Study “Reveals That Racial And Ethnic Minorities Are Highly Susceptible To Misinformation Regarding Voter Fraud.” “The Collaborative Multi-Racial Political Study reveals that a robust 57% of white Americans believes there was voter fraud in the 2020 presidential election, including 26% of whom believe there was definitely fraud in 2020. This survey also reveals that racial and ethnic minorities are highly susceptible to misinformation regarding voter fraud, as 38% of Latinos and 30% of African Americans think there might have been at least some fraud in 2020. Furthermore, in a 2021 survey by Howard University Digital Informers, a slim majority (51.5%) of respondents believe that ‘Black Americans are targets of fake news’.” [The Brookings Institution, 7/26/22]

 

Major Corporations, In Particular Tech Companies, Enable The Forces Spreading Misinformation And Disinformation.

 

MIT Technology Review: “How Facebook And Google Fund Global Misinformation.” [MIT Technology Review, 11/20/21] 

  • An MIT Technology Review Investigation “Found That Facebook And Google Are Paying Millions Of Ad Dollars To Bankroll Clickbait Actors, Fueling The Deterioration Of Information Ecosystems Around The World.” “An MIT Technology Review investigation, based on expert interviews, data analyses, and documents that were not included in the Facebook Papers, has found that Facebook and Google are paying millions of ad dollars to bankroll clickbait actors, fueling the deterioration of information ecosystems around the world.” [MIT Technology Review, 11/20/21] 

 

The Washington Post: “Facebook Groups Topped 10,000 Daily Attacks On Election Before Jan. 6, Analysis Shows.” [The Washington Post, 1/4/22]

  • The Washington Post: “Facebook Executives Have Played Down The Company’s Role In The Jan. 6 Attack And Have Resisted Calls, Including From Its Own Oversight Board, For A Comprehensive Internal Investigation.” “Facebook executives have played down the company’s role in the Jan. 6 attack and have resisted calls, including from its own Oversight Board, for a comprehensive internal investigation. The company also has yet to turn over all the information requested by the congressional committee studying the Jan. 6 attack, though it says it is negotiating with the committee.” [The Washington Post, 1/4/22]
  • A ProPublica-Washington Post Investigation “Provides The Clearest Evidence Yet That Facebook Played A Critical Role In The Spread Of False Narratives That Fomented The Violence Of Jan. 6.” “But the ProPublica-Post investigation, which analyzed millions of posts between Election Day and Jan. 6 and drew on internal company documents and interviews with former employees, provides the clearest evidence yet that Facebook played a critical role in the spread of false narratives that fomented the violence of Jan. 6.” [The Washington Post, 1/4/22]

 

NBC News: “Tech Companies Struggle With The Human Side Of Fake News.” [NBC News, 3/17/18]

 

Intel's political spending

Intel Contributed At Least $134,500 To Members Of Congress Who Opposed Federal Voting Rights Legislation.

 

During The 2022 Election Cycle, Intel Contributed At Least $134,500 To Members Of Congress Who Opposed Federal Voting Rights Legislation. [Accountable.US, Corporate Anti-Democracy Donations Database, accessed 7/11/22]

 

Congressional Republicans Blocked The Freedom To Vote: John R. Lewis Act, A Combination Of The Freedom To Vote Act And John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act.

 

All Republican Members Of The Senate Voted To Block The Freedom To Vote: John R. Lewis Act. [Govtrack, Accessed 2/7/22]

 

Of The 212 Republican Members Of The House Of Representatives, 203 Voted To Block The Freedom To Vote: John R. Lewis Act, While Nine Did Not Vote. [Govtrack, Accessed 2/7/22]

  • Reps. Cline, Green, Higgins, McClintock, Palmer, Rogers, Rutherford, Webster, And Williams Did Not Vote On The Freedom To Vote: John R. Lewis Act. [Govtrack, Accessed 2/7/22]

 

The Freedom To Vote: John R. Lewis Act, A Combination Of The Freedom To Vote Act And The John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act, Failed In The Senate After It Was Tacked On To A NASA Bill That Required A Simple Majority To Proceed To Debate. “The Senate on Wednesday voted against the Freedom to Vote Act and The John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act, striking the fatal blow into Senate Democrats’ effort to pass major voting rights legislation. On January 13, the House passed the two bills, now combined into one, titled ‘Freedom to Vote: John R. Lewis Act.’ Democrats used an unrelated NASA bill as a legislative vehicle to fast-track consideration of the measure in the Senate. Because the NASA bill had already been considered by both chambers, it proceeded to debate with a simple majority instead of the usual 60 votes required to advance to debate.” [Business Insider, 1/20/22]

 

All Congressional Republicans, Except For Sen. Lisa Murkowski, Voted To Block The John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act, Which Would Have Restored “Key Provisions Of The Voting Rights Act That Were Struck Down’ In 2013 By The Supreme Court.”

 

All Republican Members Of The House Of Representatives Voted To Block The John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act of 2021. [United States House of Representatives, Accessed 3/8/22]

 

All Republican Senators, Except For Sen. Lisa Murkowski, Voted To Block The John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act. [United States Senate, 11/3/21]

November 2021: Senate Republicans, Except For Sen. Murkowski, Blocked The John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act With A 50-49 Procedural Vote On Whether To Open Debate On The Bill. “Senate Republicans blocked the John Lewis Voting Rights Act from advancing on Wednesday when the Senate took a procedural vote on whether to open debate on the legislation. The final tally was 50 to 49 with GOP Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska voting with Democrats in favor.” [CNN, 11/3/21] 

Politico: HR4 “Would Restore Key Provisions Of The Voting Rights Act That Were Struck Down’ In 2013 By The Supreme Court. “But most Republicans also oppose the more targeted Lewis-named legislation, which would restore key provisions of the Voting Rights Act that were struck down by the Supreme Court in 2013.” [Politico, 8/24/21] 

The Hill: The John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act Would “Modernize And Restore Preclearance,” Prevent Laws That Unevenly Burden Voters Of Color, Limit Gerrymandering, And Ensure Politicians Can’t “Handpick Their Voters And Entrench Their Power.” “The John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act would modernize and restore preclearance. It would prevent voting laws that unevenly burden voters of color. It would take important steps to limit gerrymandering and make sure that politicians don’t get to handpick their voters and entrench their power. In short, it would be the most significant federal expansion of voting rights in a generation.” [The Hill, 9/3/21]

Senate Republicans Voted To Block The Freedom To Vote Act, Which Would Have Restored Voting Rights To Formally Incarcerated Individuals, Ensured People With Disabilities Had “The Same Access To Absentee Ballots As Other Voters,” And Countered “Long Lines And Related Discriminatory Practices.”

 

All Republican Members Of The Senate Voted To Block The Freedom To Vote Act. [Govtrack, Accessed 2/7/22]

 

October 2021: Senate Republicans Blocked The Freedom To Vote Act’s Passage. “Senate Republicans blocked another voting rights bill Wednesday, as some on the left call to change the chamber’s rules to allow the Democratic Party to unilaterally change federal election law. The vote was 49 to 51. The Democratic bill, known as the Freedom to Vote Act, would make it easier to register to vote, make Election Day a public holiday, ensure states have early voting for federal elections and allow all voters to request mail-in ballots.” [CNN, 10/20/21] 

 

HEADLINE: “Senate Republicans Block Democrats’ Voting And Elections Bill.” [CNN, 10/20/21] 

 

The Freedom To Vote Act Followed The For The People Act, Incorporating “Most Of The Critical Provisions From The For The People Act” As Well As “New, Much-Needed Safeguards Against Attempts To Undermine The Electoral Process.” “The Senate’s recently introduced Freedom to Vote Act (FTVA) incorporates most of the critical provisions from the For the People Act (FTPA), landmark voting rights and anticorruption legislation that passed the House of Representatives in March 2021. It also includes new, much-needed safeguards against attempts to undermine the electoral process.” [Brennan Center, 10/14/21]

  • On March 3, 2021, The For The People Act Passed The House By A Vote 220-210. [Roll Call 62, 3/3/21] 
  • On June 22, 2021, Senate Republicans Filibustered The For The People Act From Moving To The Floor For Debate. “The Senate failed to advance a sweeping voting rights bill Tuesday, stalling the Democratic legislation aimed at countering recent restrictive state measures pursued in Republican-led states. The Senate was unable to move the For the People Act to the floor for a debate. In a vote of 50-50, it fell short of the 60 needed to overcome a GOP filibuster. All Democratic senators voted to begin debate, while the Republicans unanimously voted to block it.” [USA Today, 6/22/21]

 

Brennan Center For Justice: “The Freedom To Vote Act Is Historic Legislation To Strengthen American Democracy, Promote Racial Justice And Equity For All Americans.” “The Freedom to Vote Act is historic legislation to strengthen American democracy, promote racial justice and equity for all Americans, and thwart the assault on voting rights taking place in the states. […] Congress has the legal and constitutional power to ward off these attacks by passing the Freedom to Vote Act, which would set national standards to protect the freedom to vote, counter election sabotage, end partisan redistricting, and fix our broken campaign finance system.” [Brennan Center for Justice, 9/20/21] 

 

The Freedom To Vote Act Would Restore “Federal Voting Rights To Formerly Incarcerated Citizens Upon Their Release” And Removes “The Vestiges Of Restrictions Born Out Of Jim Crow.” “The Freedom to Vote Act […] Voting rights restoration: The bill restores federal voting rights to formerly incarcerated citizens upon their release, establishing a bright-line standard to replace the confusing patchwork of state laws and removing the vestiges of restrictions born out of Jim Crow.” [Brennan Center for Justice, 9/20/21]

 

The Freedom To Vote Act “Would Require Each State To Ensure That Individuals With Disabilities Have The Same Access To Absentee Ballots And Applications As Other Voters, As Well As Making Them Electronically Accessible To Voters With Disabilities.” “The Freedom to Vote Act […] Protections for individuals with disabilities: The bill would address some of the biggest challenges to voting access that Americans with disabilities face. The bill would require each state to ensure that individuals with disabilities have the same access to absentee ballots and applications as other voters, as well as making them electronically accessible to voters with disabilities, among other safeguards.” [Brennan Center for Justice, 9/20/21]

 

The Freedom To Vote Act Counters “Long Lines And Related Discriminatory Practices” by ensuring “Lines Last No Longer Than 30 Minutes” So That “Individuals Subjected To Excessive Lines On Election Day — Most Often Black And Latino Voters —” Are Protected From That Discrimination “The Freedom to Vote Act […] Countering long lines and related discriminatory practices: The bill creates protections for individuals subjected to excessive lines on Election Day — most often Black and Latino voters — by requiring states to ensure that lines last no longer than 30 minutes and restricting states from prohibiting donations of food or water to voters waiting in line.” [Brennan Center for Justice, 9/20/21]

During The 2022 Election Cycle, Intel Has Contributed At Least $15,500 To The Members Of Congress Who Objected To Certifying The Results Of The 2020 Presidential Election.

 

During The 2022 Election Cycle, Intel Has Contributed At Least $15,500 To The Members Of Congress Who Objected To Certifying The Results Of The 2020 Presidential Election. [Accountable.US, Corporate Anti-Democracy Donations Database, accessed 7/11/22]

 

Several Corporations Suspended Donations To Lawmakers After 147 Members Of Congress Still Objected To Certifying The Results Of The Election Following The Insurrection At The Capitol.

 

On January 6, 2021, A Violent Mob Stormed The U.S. Capitol In Response To Congress’ Constitutionally Mandated Counting Of The Electoral College Results “In A Stunning Attempt To Overturn America’s Presidential Election.” “A violent mob loyal to President Donald Trump stormed the U.S. Capitol on Wednesday and forced lawmakers into hiding, in a stunning attempt to overturn America’s presidential election, undercut the nation’s democracy and keep Democrat Joe Biden from replacing Trump in the White House. […] Tensions were already running high when lawmakers gathered early Wednesday afternoon for the constitutionally mandated counting of the Electoral College results, in which Biden defeated Trump, 306-232.” [AP, 1/6/21]

 

Following The Violence At The Capitol On January 6, Four People In The Crowd Died. “As a pro-Trump protest turned into a violent attack on the Capitol on Jan. 6 last year, four people in the crowd died.” [The New York Times, 1/5/22]

 

147 Members Of Congress Objected To Certifying The 2020 Presidential Election. [The New York Times, 1/7/21]

 

Following January 6, Several Corporations Suspended Donations To The 147 Lawmakers Who Objected To Certifying The Results Of The 2020 Presidential Election And Some Temporarily Paused Donations To Assess Their Political Giving Policies. “A growing list of companies are cutting off donations to politicians who opposed the Electoral College results, targeting the 147 Republican members of the House and the Senate who voted against affirming President-elect Joe Biden’s victory. Republican lawmakers attempted to challenge the results of Arizona and Pennsylvania, two swing states Biden won, during and after a violent and deadly attack on the U.S. Capitol by a pro-Trump mob. In light of those events, some companies are temporarily suspending any political action committee (PAC) donations to all lawmakers as they assess their policies.” [The Hill, 1/12/21]

During The 2022 Election Cycle, Intel Has Contributed At Least $132,000 To Members Of Congress Who Opposed The Formation Of A January 6th Commission Or The Select Committee To Investigate January 6th.

 

During The 2022 Election Cycle, Intel Has Contributed At Least $132,000 To Members Of Congress Who Did Not Support The Formation Of A January 6th Commission Or The Committee To Investigate January 6th. [Accountable.US, Corporate Anti-Democracy Donations Database, accessed 7/11/22]

 

After Senate Republicans Blocked A Bill To Establish An Independent Commission To Investigate The January 6th Attack, The House Narrowly Passed Legislation Establishing A Select Committee To Do The Same. 

 

On May 19, 2021, 35 House Republicans Joined The Majority Of House Members In Voting For “An Independent Commission To Investigate The January 6 Insurrection.” “Thirty-five House Republican broke ranks Wednesday evening to support legislation that would establish an independent commission to investigate the January 6 insurrection at the US Capitol. The bill now moves to the Senate where it faces an uncertain fate as GOP resistance is growing.” [CNN, 5/19/21]

 

On May 28, 2021, Senate Republicans Filibustered “Bipartisan legislation to establish an independent commission to investigate the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol.” “Bipartisan legislation to establish an independent commission to investigate the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol has failed in the Senate, as Republicans staged their first filibuster since President Biden took office to block the plan. The final vote Friday was 54-35, but Republicans withheld the votes necessary to bring the bill up for debate. Just six GOP senators joined with the Democrats, leaving the measure short of the 60 votes needed to proceed.” [NPR, 5/28/21]

 

On June 30, 2021, Reps. Adam Kinzinger And Liz Cheney Were The Only House Republicans Who Voted To Create A Select Committee To Investigate January 6. “Only two House Republicans — Liz Cheney of Wyoming and Adam Kinzinger of Illinois — voted Wednesday to create a select committee to investigate the deadly January 6 attack on the US Capitol. Both GOP lawmakers, who are frequent critics of former President Donald Trump, were among the 35 House Republicans who voted to establish an independent commission, which was blocked by Senate Republicans.” [CNN, 6/30/21]

 

The Select Committee On January 6 Aims To Investigate The Attack At The Capitol On January 6, 2021. [Select Committee to Investigate the January 6 Attack on the United States Capitol, Accessed 3/3/21]

During The 2022 Election Cycle, Intel Does Not Appear To Have Contributed To State Officials Who Voted For Anti-Voter Legislation.

 

During The 2022 Election Cycle, Intel Does Not Appear To Have Contributed To State Officials Who Voted For Anti-Voter Legislation. [Accountable.US, Corporate Anti-Democracy Donations Database, accessed 7/11/22]

 

Since Early 2021, States Have Passed 32 Restrictive Voting Laws, Including Laws In Georgia And Texas That Would Restrict Ballot Access In Urban Areas And Curtail Local Control Of Elections.

 

In December 2021, The Brennan Center Identified That “Between January 1 And December 7, At Least 19 States Passed 34 Laws Restricting Access To Voting.” “Between January 1 and December 7, at least 19 states passed 34 laws restricting access to voting. More than 440 bills with provisions that restrict voting access have been introduced in 49 states in the 2021 legislative sessions. These numbers are extraordinary: state legislatures enacted far more restrictive voting laws in 2021 than in any year since the Brennan Center began tracking voting legislation in 2011. More than a third of all restrictive voting laws enacted since then were passed this year.” [Brennan Center for Justice, 12/21/21]

  • The 34 Restrictive Bills Were “Categorized As Restrictive If They Would Make It Harder For Americans To Register, Stay On The Rolls, And/Or Vote As Compared To Existing State Law.” “AL H.B. 285, AL H.B. 538, AR H.B. 1112, AR H.B. 1244, AR H.B. 1715, AR S.B. 643, AZ S.B. 1003, AZ S.B. 1485, AZ S.B. 1819, FL S.B. 90, GA S.B. 202, IA S.F. 413, IA S.F. 568, ID H.B. 290, IN S.B. 398, KS H.B. 2183, KS H.B. 2332, KY H.B. 574, LA H.B. 167, MT H.B. 176, MT H.B. 530, MT S.B. 169, MT S.B. 196, MT S.B. 319, NH H.B. 523, NH S.B. 31, NV S.B. 84, NY S.B. 264, OK H.B. 2663, TX H.B. 3920, TX S.B. 1111, TX S.B. 1, UT H.B. 12, WY H.B. 75. Provisions are categorized as restrictive if they would make it harder for Americans to register, stay on the rolls, and/or vote as compared to existing state law.” [Brennan Center for Justice, 12/21/21]

 

In May 2022, The Brennan Center Reported That, “After Obtaining Additional Information About The Way In Which NV S.B. 84 And LA H.B. 167 Will Operate In Nevada And Louisiana, Respectively, [The Brennan Center Has] Removed The Two Laws From The List Of Restrictive Laws Passed In 2021.” “As of December 2021, the Brennan Center reported that 19 states passed 34 restrictive laws in 2021. After obtaining additional information about the way in which NV S.B. 84 and LA H.B. 167 will operate in Nevada and Louisiana, respectively, we have removed the two laws from the list of restrictive laws passed in 2021.” [Brennan Center for Justice, 5/26/22]

  • In August 2021, Georgia’s Voter Restriction Law Was Signed, Which “Will, In Particular, Curtail Ballot Access For Voters In Booming Urban And Suburban Counties” And “Another Provision Makes It A Crime To Offer Water To Voters Waiting In Lines, Which Tend To Be Longer In Densely Populated Communities.” “Republicans passed and signed the 98-page voting law last week following the first Democratic victories in presidential and Senate elections in Georgia in a generation. President Biden won the state by just 11,779 votes out of nearly five million cast. The new law will, in particular, curtail ballot access for voters in booming urban and suburban counties, home to many Democrats. Another provision makes it a crime to offer water to voters waiting in lines, which tend to be longer in densely populated communities.” [The New York Times, 8/18/21]
  • In September 2021, Texas’ Voter Restriction Law Was Signed, Which “Further Tightens State Election Laws And Constrains Local Control Of Elections By Limiting Counties’ Ability To Expand Voting Options.” “Gov. Greg Abbott on Tuesday signed into law Senate Bill 1, sweeping legislation that further tightens state election laws and constrains local control of elections by limiting counties’ ability to expand voting options.” [The Texas Tribune, 9/7/21]

 

During The 2022 Election Cycle, Intel Does Not Appear To Have Contributed To Elected Officials Who Continue To Peddle The “Big Lie” Via Election Audits Since The 2020 Election.

 

During The 2022 Election Cycle, Intel Does Not Appear To Have Contributed To Elected Officials Who Continue To Peddle The “Big Lie” Via Election Audits Since The 2020 Election. [Accountable.US, Corporate Anti-Democracy Donations Database, accessed 7/11/22]

 

2020 Election Audits Efforts Perpetuated The “Big Lie” With Baseless Claims Of Election Fraud.

 

The New York Times: 24 Percent Of Republican Lawmakers In Closely Contested Battleground States “Voted For An Outside, Partisan Review Of The 2020 Election (Often Referred To As An ‘Audit’). The Reviews Have Been Used To Justify New Voting Laws And Efforts To Decertify The 2020 Election.” “24 percent of the Republican lawmakers voted for an outside, partisan review of the 2020 election (often referred to as an ‘audit’). The reviews have been used to justify new voting laws and efforts to decertify the 2020 election.” [The New York Times, 5/22/22]

  • The New York Times: “At Least 357 Sitting Republican Legislators In Closely Contested Battleground States Have Used The Power Of Their Office To Discredit Or Try To Overturn The Results Of The 2020 Presidential Election.” “At least 357 sitting Republican legislators in closely contested battleground states have used the power of their office to discredit or try to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election, according to a review of legislative votes, records and official statements by The New York Times. The tally accounts for 44 percent of the Republican legislators in the nine states where the presidential race was most narrowly decided. In each of those states, the election was conducted without any evidence of widespread fraud, leaving election officials from both parties in agreement on the victory of Joseph R. Biden Jr.” [The New York Times, 5/22/22]

 

The “Controversial Election Audit” In Arizona Wrapped Up By Increasing President Joe Biden’s Margin Of Victory” While Conservatives In Other States Began Pursuing “Probes That Could Sow New Doubts In The Presidential Vote Count.” “Arizona’s highly controversial election audit wrapped up Friday as the GOP-backed company conducting it announced the investigation had actually increased President Joe Biden’s margin of victory—but Republicans in multiple other states are already underway on other probes that could sow new doubts in the presidential vote count.” [Forbes, 9/26/21]

  • HEADLINE: “‘Big Lie’ Election Audits Go On After Arizona: Here’s What’s Happening In Wisconsin, Pennsylvania—And Now Texas.” [Forbes, 9/26/21]

 

In Wisconsin, Assembly Speaker Vos’ Election Investigation Moved Forward, “Led By A Former State Supreme Court Justice Who Has Expressed Openness To MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell’s Baseless Claims Of Election Fraud.” “Three different election investigations are underway in Wisconsin: an investigation initiated by Republican Assembly Speaker Robin Vos, a separate so-called forensic audit modeled after Arizona by GOP Rep. Janel Brandtjen and an investigation by the state’s nonpartisan Legislative Audit Bureau, which the Republican-led legislature asked it to conduct. While Brandtjen’s audit has stalled after Vos refused to sign subpoenas for counties’ election equipment, Vos’ investigation is moving forward, led by a former state Supreme Court justice who has expressed openness to MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell’s baseless claims of election fraud.” [Forbes, 9/26/21]

 

HEADLINE: “’Audit’ Idiocy And Peddling Of The Big Lie Persist In Pennsylvania, With Help From Lancaster County State Rep. Dave Zimmerman.” [LancasterOnline, 9/5/21]

 

Election Lies And Partisan Election Audits Around The U.S. “Have Been Used To Justify New Voting Laws” And Present “A Clear, New Threat To The Health Of American Democracy.”

 

The New York Times: 24 Percent Of Republican Lawmakers In Closely Contested Battleground States “Voted For An Outside, Partisan Review Of The 2020 Election (Often Referred To As An ‘Audit’). The Reviews Have Been Used To Justify New Voting Laws And Efforts To Decertify The 2020 Election.” “24 percent of the Republican lawmakers voted for an outside, partisan review of the 2020 election (often referred to as an ‘audit’). The reviews have been used to justify new voting laws and efforts to decertify the 2020 election.” [The New York Times, 5/22/22]

 

Election Lies “Have Provided The Foundation For New Laws That Make It Harder To Vote And Easier To Insert Partisanship In The Vote Count.” “These fictions about rigged elections and widespread fraud have provided the foundation for new laws that make it harder to vote and easier to insert partisanship in the vote count. In three states, Arizona, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, state lawmakers successfully pushed for investigations that sowed doubt about the results and tested the boundaries of their oversight.” [The New York Times, 5/22/22]

 

The New York Times: “Election And Democracy Experts Say They See The Rise Of Anti-Democratic Impulses In Statehouses As A Clear, New Threat To The Health Of American Democracy.” “Election and democracy experts say they see the rise of anti-democratic impulses in statehouses as a clear, new threat to the health of American democracy. State legislatures hold a unique position in the country’s democratic apparatus, wielding a constitutionally mandated power to set the “times, places and manner of holding elections.” Cheered on by Mr. Trump as he eyes another run for the White House in 2024, many state legislators have shown they see that power as license to exert greater control over the outcome of elections.” [The New York Times, 5/22/22]

 

During The 2022 Election Cycle, Key Intel Staff Have Made Large Contributions Totaling $15,241 To Anti-Democracy Federal Legislators.

 

During The 2022 Election Cycle, Key Intel Staff Have Made Large Contributions Totaling $15,241 To Anti-Democracy Federal Legislators. [Accountable.US, Corporate Anti-Democracy Donations Database, accessed 7/11/22]

 

During The 2022 Election Cycle, Congressional Republicans Made A Series Of Anti-Democracy Votes By Objecting To Certify The 2020 Election, Blocking Federal Voting Protections, And Stymying A Congressional Investigation Into The January 6th Attack On The Capitol.

 

In January 2021, 147 Members Of Congress Objected To Certifying The 2020 Presidential Election. [The New York Times, 1/7/21]

 

In May 2021, Only 35 House Republicans Joined The Majority Of House Members In Voting For “An Independent Commission To Investigate The January 6 Insurrection.” “Thirty-five House Republican broke ranks Wednesday evening to support legislation that would establish an independent commission to investigate the January 6 insurrection at the US Capitol. The bill now moves to the Senate where it faces an uncertain fate as GOP resistance is growing.” [CNN, 5/19/21]

 

In May 2021, Senate Republicans Filibustered “Bipartisan Legislation To Establish An Independent Commission To Investigate The Jan. 6 Attack On The U.S. Capitol.” “Bipartisan legislation to establish an independent commission to investigate the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol has failed in the Senate, as Republicans staged their first filibuster since President Biden took office to block the plan. The final vote Friday was 54-35, but Republicans withheld the votes necessary to bring the bill up for debate. Just six GOP senators joined with the Democrats, leaving the measure short of the 60 votes needed to proceed.” [NPR, 5/28/21]

 

In June 2021, Reps. Adam Kinzinger And Liz Cheney Were The Only House Republicans Who Voted To Create A Select Committee To Investigate January 6. “Only two House Republicans — Liz Cheney of Wyoming and Adam Kinzinger of Illinois — voted Wednesday to create a select committee to investigate the deadly January 6 attack on the US Capitol. Both GOP lawmakers, who are frequent critics of former President Donald Trump, were among the 35 House Republicans who voted to establish an independent commission, which was blocked by Senate Republicans.” [CNN, 6/30/21]

 

In August 2021, All Republican Members Of The House Of Representatives Voted To Block The John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act of 2021. [United States House of Representatives, 8/24/21]

 

In October 2021, All Republican Members Of The Senate Voted To Block The Freedom To Vote Act. [Govtrack, 10/20/22]

 

In November 2021, All Republican Senators, Except For Sen. Lisa Murkowski, Voted To Block The John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act. [United States Senate, 11/3/21]

 

In January 2022, 203 Republican Members Of The House Of Representatives Voted To Block The Freedom To Vote: John R. Lewis Act, While Nine House Republicans Did Not Vote. [Govtrack, 1/13/22]

  • Reps. Cline, Green, Higgins, McClintock, Palmer, Rogers, Rutherford, Webster, And Williams Did Not Vote On The Freedom To Vote: John R. Lewis Act. [Govtrack, 1/13/22]

 

In January 2022, All Republican Members Of The Senate Voted To Block The Freedom To Vote: John R. Lewis Act. [Govtrack, 1/19/22]

Intel Is A Member Of The U. S. Chamber Of Commerce.

 

Intel Is A Member Of The U.S. Chamber Of Commerce. [Intel Political Contributions, Accessed 3/24/22]

 

The Chamber Of Commerce Is A Political Donor, Having Given Millions To Political Candidates In Recent Elections. [Open Secrets, Accessed 3/11/22]

 

The U.S. Chamber Of Commerce Fiercely Opposed Federal Voting Rights Legislation, Specifically The For The People Act, Making It A Key Vote For The Organization’s Annual How They Voted Scorecard.

 

April 2021: The U.S. Chamber Of Commerce Faced Controversy Over Its “Fierce Opposition” To The “Sweeping Voting Bill Known As The For The People Act,” Which Would Have Countered Voting Restrictions That Were Advancing In Georgia And Other States. “Progressive activists are calling on Ford, Target, Google, Bank of America and other major companies that have pledged to support voting rights to cut ties with the US Chamber of Commerce, CNN Business has learned. At issue is the Chamber of Commerce’s fierce opposition to the Democrats’ sweeping voting bill known as the For the People Act, which advocates say would counter efforts by Georgia and other states to impose new voting restrictions.” [CNN, 04/21/21]


The For The People Act Would Make It Easier To Vote, Limit Gerrymandering Of Congressional Districts, Require Third-Party Groups To Reveal Secret Donors and Reform An Election Watchdog. “The U.S. Chamber of Commerce urged U.S. senators to reject a voting reform bill passed by the Democratic House — and the powerful business lobby warned that it might highlight where they stand on the issue.  […] The legislation would make it significantly easier to vote, limit gerrymandering of congressional districts, require third-party groups to reveal secret donors and reform an election watchdog, among other changes. It passed the House, 220 to 210, last month as Republican lawmakers in several states advanced legislation that would impose new rules and restrictions on voting.” [Bloomberg, 4/13/21]

 

The Chamber Of Commerce Opposed The For The People Act, Making It A Key Vote, Saying It Would “Consider Including Votes Related To This Bill In Our Annual How They Voted Scorecard.” “The U.S. Chamber of Commerce strongly opposes S. 1, disingenuously named the “For the People Act of 2021.” The Chamber will consider including votes related to this bill in our annual How They Voted scorecard.” [Chamber of Commerce, 4/13/21]

 

Download Full Report

Send Me Updates

Be the first to know when corporations take actions that affect their scores, and get other newsworthy updates.